ARC: Aave Governance Process Improvements

ARC: Aave Governance Process Improvements.

Authors: @Kene_StableLab & @MarcZeller (Aave Chan Initiative)


ARFC: Aave Request for Final Comments (ARFCs)

ARC: Aave Request for Comments (ARCs)

AIP: Aave Improvement Proposal (AIP)

TEMP CHECK: Temperature Check

Simple Summary

The Aave Governance Process Improvements proposal introduces changes to the current governance process to create a more agile and robust process.


According to the Aave Governance Process, there is no clear distinction on which kind of proposals govern different aspects of the Aave Protocol. There are ARCs, ARFCs and AIPs that govern all aspects of the Aave Protocol.

This proposal aims to streamline the Aave Governance Process by renaming ARCs to become known as TEMP CHECKs and clearly defining the specific kinds of proposals that are TEMP CHECKs and which kinds of proposals will be regarded as ARFCs.


Due to the lack of a clear distinction between the proposals in Aave Governance, the Aave Governance Process is overwhelmed by proposals which could have shorter proposal timelines because they have been previously discussed and form part of the day-to-day operations of the Aave DAO.

This proposal is intended to shorten the lifecycle for mature proposals involving Risk Service Providers’ direct involvement while clearly distinguishing which proposals have to pass through the entire Aave Governance Process to enable ample community feedback and participation.


TEMP CHECKs shall become the first step in the Aave Governance Process; if a proposal falls into the scope of a TEMP CHECK as defined below, then the proposal shall start as a TEMP CHECK, and after the TEMP CHECK phase, the proposal shall be submitted as an ARFC before becoming an AIP.

However, where a proposal does not fall under the TEMP CHECK scope, the proposal will be regarded as an ARFC and subsequently become an AIP.


We recommend the renaming of ARCs to become known as TEMP CHECKs.

Proposal Distinctions


Any proposal which falls under the scope outlined below will be known as a TEMP CHECK, and the title of the proposal must contain “TEMP CHECK”. TEMP CHECKs are proposal conversation starters which do not require input from Aave DAO Service Providers.

  • Any discussion which requires general community feedback.
  • Discussing listing of Assets not previously listed in any Aave Market.
  • Any proposal which involves deploying Aave on a new network.
  • Any discussion or proposal which involves the assessment of GHO Facilitator candidates.
  • Any discussion or proposal which involves the assessment of Portals Operator candidates.
  • Any discussion or proposal which involves the assessment of New Service Provider Candidates.


These refer to mature and significant technical proposals which require the input of Aave DAO Risk Service Providers. The format of an ARFC must align with the format of an AIP, which will be escalated to Snapshot and subsequently On-Chain Aave Governance.

The following proposals fall within the scope of an ARFC:

  • Risk Parameter Changes of currently onboarded assets.
  • A proposal involving the onboarding of an asset which is already onboarded on an Aave Market.
  • Any proposal involving the renewal of a previously engaged Aave Service Provider.

NB: It is important to note that the Fast Track & Direct to AIP shortcuts, such as the Caps Update Framework, are still valid under this amendment; these shortcuts are designed to enable quick mechanical improvements of the Aave Protocol.

Next Steps

Discuss the Proposal

Move it to a vote on Snapshot

Because this is a governance framework, no AIP will be required.

[Yes]: Implement these governance changes


[No]: Do not implement these governance changes


The ACI is supportive of this proposal,

the current governance guidelines are not clear enough,

and ARC/ARFC are more than confusing terminology.

Please note that this ARFC is designed to implement guidelines about the governance proposal process but does not aim to define or modify current guidelines for ARC (candidate to be TEMP CHECK) or ARFC.

The ACI & Stablenode will propose new templates for TEMP CHECKs & ARFC shortly.


Great proposal.

When we at Wallfacer made our recent post, ​
[ARC] RWA Facilitator Onboarding Framework , we made it as an ARC because that felt like the most official first step, but at the same time, I was pretty unsure. “Temp check” feels more descriptive for what our post actually was.

Your proposal above seems like a great way to make the process clearer (and hopefully encourage more community involvement!)

1 Like

Thanks Stablelab! Using this

as a reference document, I see that asset onboarding proposal have the follow timeline parameters

  • Post a governance thread [now called TEMP CHECK] for 5 days
  • Snapshot vote for 3 days (24 hours after gov thread/TEMP CHECK)
    ARFC timeline unclear but I suggest 5 days
  • Post an AIP vote for 5 days (Minimum 80k required)

Since this proposal plans consolidate all pre snapshot votes into a single category, I suggest using the same timeline for new TEMP CHECK process.

1 Like

This proposal has been escalated to Snapshot stage

voting starts tomorrow.

Thanks @MarcZeller and @Kene_StableLab. We’ve been confused by ARC vs ARFC, so it’s great that each stage of the proposal process now is distinctly define with its own name.

A clarifying question: will the term ARC still be used? If yes, what will it mean?

If this framework is to be adopted, the term ARC is to be deprecated completely in favor of TEMP CHECK

don’t worry it was confusing as hell for me too, as we had the AAVE ARC institutional product as well :grin:


Thanks for the clarification!

1 Like